“I take executive action only when we have a serious problem, a serious issue and Congress chooses to do nothing,” Obama said. “In this situation, the failure of the House Republicans to pass a darn bill is bad for our security, it’s bad for our economy, and it’s bad for our future.” – The Blaze 6/30/14
Fact Check: This statement by Obama came shortly after House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) said that the House would not consider an immigration bill this year. Ironically, Boehner and other high-ranking House Republicans also want to pass “a darn bill” authorizing amnesty for illegal aliens and a hefty increase in legal immigration. It’s just that they wanted some assurance from Obama that he would enforce immigration laws in the future (which he isn’t doing now) and respect the lawful authority of Congress to make immigration law. These minimal conditions were necessary for Boehner and the others to win over enough GOP House members to pass a bill containing amnesty.
But Obama, in his arrogance, could not even yield that much. Prior to Boehner’s statement, the president threatened executive [read “dictatorial”] action if he didn’t get what he wanted, and now he promises to carry that threat through with more unilateral proclamations of legal status (amnesty) for illegal aliens. Obama decreed his first amnesty in 2012 for illegal aliens in the Dream Act category. Prior to that action he admitted that he didn’t have the legal authority to do so.
And indeed he doesn’t. Our constitutional form of government limits the authority of each branch of government, and gives each branch various legal means to restrain the others. The purpose of these “checks and balances” is to safeguard our liberties by preventing one branch from acting in an arbitrary dictatorial fashion.
This is exactly what Obama is doing. Under the Constitution, the presidential branch (the executive) doesn’t have authority to make laws. That prerogative belongs to Congress, the legislative branch. The executive is supposed to enforce the laws passed by Congress.
Obama has it turned around. He doesn’t enforce the immigration laws on the books. With contrived legal pretexts, he simply ignores them. At the same time, he claims the right to proclaim law if he sees a “serious problem.” Sadly some people think this is a proper justification to use what Obama calls “executive action.” They might reflect that dictators commonly claim that “serious problems” justify their actions. Once again, this is not the way our system of government is supposed to work.
If this principle being established by Obama continues, one wonders where it will stop. Will he or some future president decide that criticism of the White House is “a serious problem” and simply decree an end to free speech? To stop this principle from progressing, Congress and the Judiciary must step in to restrain it.
To that end, Boehner is proposing legislation in the House to file a lawsuit to curtail Obama’s “executive actions.” The president, in response, mocked this proposal and called it “a stunt.” Significantly, the proposal does not mention what Obama has done with immigration, probably the most egregious of those actions which involve a number of other issues.
Given Boehner’s disposition for amnesty, Obama may be right that this is simply a stunt—one to placate House members who want effective action. In this case, it will be up to them to insist on determined steps to uphold the proper division of powers in government. For them to prevail they must have the vocal support of average citizens. Obama has issued his challenge, Americans who care for liberty must respond.